AKSHAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri V.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ajay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Akashi Agrawal, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Rahul Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

(2.) The petitioner who has been subjected to disciplinary proceedings under the U.P. State District Court Service Rules, 2013, is aggrieved by the order dtd. 25/4/2023 passed by the disciplinary authority, namely, the District Judge, Saharanpur, whereby he has remitted the matter to the Enquiry Officer to clarify on certain points by giving a fresh report.

(3.) Learned Senior Advocate has argued that this amounts to an act of disagreement by the disciplinary authority in matter of finding returned by the enquiry officer and, therefore, he needed to be afforded an opportunity of hearing by the disciplinary authority in the first instance. He submits that in matter of enquiry if supportive findings have come to be referred in favour of the delinquent employee, any disagreement by the disciplinary authority would naturally amount to negating the findings of the Enquiry Officer and, therefore, the delinquent employee is required to be heard.